Hello Tilman, Thanks for the response.
Attached are the file, screnshot of the Acrobat DC Pro Security Settings and their comparison to the PDF Box Debugger. [image: Inline image 1] [image: Inline image 2] Best regards, Stan On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 11:57 AM, Tilman Hausherr <[email protected]> wrote: > You're right that PDFBox does not consider the revision. Code excerpt: > > else if( isUserPassword(password.getBytes(passwordCharset), > userKey, ownerKey, > dicPermissions, documentIDBytes, dicRevision, > dicLength, encryptMetadata) ) > { > currentAccessPermission = new AccessPermission(dicPermission > s); > > > "dicPermissions" is the value of the /Encrypt/P entry. "dicRevision" is > the value of the /Encrypt/R entry and obviously, it isn't used when the > AccessPermission is initialized. > > I've not fully understood your text: what do you mean with 'bitwise > "Encrypt Flag"' ? Do you mean the /Encrypt/P entry? > > If you are working on something, please open an issue and submit the > patch, so that the work isn't done twice. > > I'd also be interested in a test file to better understand the problem. > > Tilman > > PS: The 1.8 version is outdated. Use 2.0.3. > > > Am 29.09.2016 um 22:51 schrieb Stan Ivaciov: > >> Thank you for a great PDF tool. We have come up against a small issue >> while testing encrypted documents with restrictions for filling out forms >> set. >> >> The PDF spec, http://www.adobe.com/content/d >> am/Adobe/en/devnet/acrobat/pdfs/PDF32000_2008.pdf, pages 59-61, >> describes that bit 9 "/can fill in form fields/" can only be considered by >> Security Handlers of revision 3 or greater. Older versions should rely on >> bit 6, see perm_spec.png^<https://jira.accusoft.com/secure/attachment/ >> 54791/54791_perm_spec.png>, perm_spec_Rev.png^<https://jir >> a.accusoft.com/secure/attachment/54792/54792_perm_spec_Rev.png> >> >> (The idea described in the spec is that granulation of permissions is >> extended with revision, and up to 2008 year it has 4 revisions, from 1 to >> 4, and our PDF sample has only 2-nd revision, which is seen by PDFBOX). >> >> Could you please confirm our overall conclusion: PDFBox does not support >> this bit at the moment and to imitate Acrobat behaviour and fix this issue >> outside of PDFBox; we need to add a logic which would be considering both >> bitwise "Encrypt Flag" and the Revision Number of Security Handler. >> >> Maybe this also could be an improvement in one of the future PDFBox >> release. >> >> >> Best regards, >> >> Stan >> >> >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] >> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] >> > > >
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
